Transcription

1 Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2007 The Apologia of Franchino Gafurio: a critical edition and translation Patrick Joseph Kaufman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Music Commons Recommended Citation Kaufman, Patrick Joseph, "The Apologia of Franchino Gafurio: a critical edition and translation" (2007). LSU Master's Theses This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact

2 THE APOLOGIA OF FRANCHINO GAFURIO: A CRITICAL EDITION AND TRANSLATION A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Music in The School of Music by Patrick J. Kaufman B.A., Murray State University, 200 December 2007

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank my advisor Jan Herlinger for spending so many long Monday afternoons untangling and debating the finer points of Humanistic Latin. I would also like to express my sincerest gratitude for his patience and perseverance as we journeyed up this steep learning curve. He has repeatedly taught me that being careful, thoughtful, and precise are the fundamental virtues of scholarship. ii

5 ABSTRACT Franchino Gafurio s Apologia (Turin, 1520) is one musical treatise in a series of works that constituted the famous pamphlet war between he and Giovanni Spataro. The dispute originated with the publication of Bartholomeo Ramis de Pareia s Musica practica (Bologna, 1482). Unconventional and unapologetically critical, Ramis rejected venerated musical traditions in an attempt to align music theory with contemporary music practice. He opposed the Pythagorean division of the monochord and Guidonian solmization syllables, and instead proposed a division which produced pure thirds, and a solmization system based on the octave. His iconoclastic proposals and his highly sarcastic tone called forth a firestorm of backlash. Gafurio entered the debate as an opponent of Ramis, though his main focus was on Spataro: his Apologia, Epistula prima in solutiones obiectorum Io. Vaginarii Bononiensis (Milan, 1521), and Epistula secunda apologetica (Milan, 1521) all respond to claims made by Spataro. Gafurio and Spataro then engaged in a private correspondence lasting a quarter century, of which many of the letters are now lost. Thus, the works of Gafurio serve to frame the entire course of the controversy. This fifty year period was very important in the development of music. The changes proposed by Ramis and later defended by Spataro constitute a distinct shift in the way in which earlier theoretical ideas were valued. Seemingly indisputable laws concerning the practice and composition of music were now re-examined under the lens of humanistic empiricism. This new edition of Gafurio s Apologia will be a contribution to the larger body of research on Gafurio and his role in the controversy. Of Gafurio s nine printed works, only three, Theorica musice (Milan, 1492), Practica musice (Milan, 1496), and De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus (Milan, 1518), exist in English translation. The theorists involved in the iv

6 controversy were of the first generation to see their works printed, and of them, Gafurio was arguably the most influential. v

7 INTRODUCTION The Apologia Franchini Gafurii adversus Joannem Spatarium et complices musicos bononienses (Turin, 1520), 1 dedicated to Jean Grolier, 2 was the first in a series of five published works that constitute the famous pamphlet war between the Italian theorists Franchino Gafurio ( ) and Giovanni Spataro ( ). 3 In this public debate, Gafurio was a proponent of traditional musical ideologies as laid down in the writings of Boethius and Guido d Arezzo, while Spataro championed the unorthodox views of his teacher Bartholomeo Ramis, whose Musica practica (Bologna, 1482) proved a watershed moment in the history of music theory. 4 The Apologia is a response to a series of eighteen letters, 5 now lost; sent by Spataro to Gafurio, in which Spataro discussed particular problems found in Gafurio s De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus. This was not the first time that the two theorists had clashed theoretical swords. Prior to the said correspondence Spataro had sent a copy of the Musica practica to Gafurio which Franchino returned with added, and apparently unwanted, corrections. 6 Spataro was so enraged that in a letter to Pietro Aaron wrote that If I could find another one, I would buy it and throw this one into the fire so that no one should ever see the 1 The primary source for this critical edition is the facsimile edition (New York: Broude Brothers Limited, 1979). 2 Gafurio also dedicated his De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus (Milan, 1518) to Grolier. 3 The remaining four works are: Spataro s Errori de Franchino Gafurio da Lodi, da Maestro Ioanne Spatario musico bolognese, in sua deffensione et del suo preceptore maestro Bartolomeo Ramis hispano subtilemente demonstrati (Bologna, 1521), Gafurio s Epistula prima in solutiones obiectorum Ioannis Vaginarii Bononiensis (Milan, 1521), Spataro s Dilucide et probatissime demonstratione de Maestro Zoanne Spatario musico bolognese, contra certe frivole et vane excusatione, da Franchino Gafurio (maestro de li errori) in luce aducte (Bologna, 1521), and Gafurio s Epistula secunda apologetica Franchini Gafurii Musicis solutiones obiectorum Ionnis Vaginarii Bononiensis (Milan, 1521). 4 Ramis defiantly challenged long held opinions regarding Pythagorean tuning and Guido s solmization system. 5 Spataro mentions this correspondence in a letter to Del Lago, dated Aug. 23, See A Correspondence of Renaissance Musicians, ed. Bonnie J. Blackburn, Edward E. Lowinsky, and Clement A. Miller (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1991), Bologna, Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale, MS A

8 comments he scribbled on my copy. 7 Even nine years after Gafurio s death, Spataro was still continuing the debate in his Tractato di musica (Venice, 1531). The greater part of the Apologia is naturally borrowed from his De harmonia, but Gafurio also uses a wide variety of quotations, often obscure, from various classical writers including Aristotle, Cato, and Boethius, and in so doing fulfills his promise in the introduction of the Apologia to recall into light through the testimony of learned men the truth, gushing from the sources of the Greeks and the Latins. This extensive collection of quotations also serves to demonstrate his wide knowledge of classical writings and in turn his presumed superiority over Spataro, whom Gafurio, at every opportunity, describes as illiteratus in regard to Latin. Throughout the course of the work, Gafurio engages Spataro in discussions on a variety of topics: various divisions of the tone, the usefulness of Gafurio s mixed genus in dividing the monochord, different harmonic means, the arrangement and classifications of modes, various definitions of the word tetrachord, the sizes of semitones used in contemporary musical practice, and a lengthy discussion of Ramis s tenor Tu Lumen, Tu Splendor Patris. Gafurio also never misses the chance to deliver scathingly derogatory and imaginative opinions of Spataro s character, which sets the overall tone of the Apologia apart from other theoretical treatises. In the present edition, the Latin text is presented on verso pages, with marginal glosses and textual corrections appearing at the bottom. Medieval orthography is retained, but with i/j, u/v, double consonants, and assimilation normalized. An English translation appears recto pages, with critical commentary in footnotes. Also included are facsimiles of the woodcuts used for diagrams and pictures, appearing on their respective verso page, with a modernized transcription appearing on the facing recto page. 7 Correspondence of Renaissance Musicians,

11 The Apology of Franchino Gafurio against Giovanni Spataro and his musical accomplices of Bologna. 1. Giovanni Spataro, you, who are accustomed to speak about others, 8 present the opportunity to speak about you. Wherefore one should be the more justly enraged at you to the extent that you have attacked my studious works more harshly with a certain frenzy and this has turned out to my credit so that when you, who are very close to madness, seem to condemn my things rashly, you display every foolishness that is not free from blame. But the nature of a silly and insolent man is discerned to be such that unless it is reprimanded by either a sharp objection or stick or chain, it truly becomes overbearing; so that it thinks to prefer itself over all [others], and trusts in the modesty and taciturnity, the fear or ignorance of man. But since these are those things which are not expected among the learned, I will pay attention that by the most exquisite doctrine and most effective reasoning, truth may shine forth to anyone skilled in music, and you may be held the impudent false accuser, whom the school of Bolognese musicians had not recognized. Now let it be right to censure your long-hidden madnesses, not with the sharpness with which I should censure them, but with the modesty to which I am accustomed. Indeed I do not think that anything that is relevant to detecting your ignorance is going to be hidden from you. It often happens that those who are held by the pursuit of obstructing or slandering, when they pursue foreign learning, bring forth a particular petulance. 8 Spataro s Bartolomei Ramis Honesta Defensio in Nicolai Burtii Parmensis Opusculum (Bologna, 1491) was a scathing rebuttal of Niccolo Burzio s Musices opusculum (Bologna, 1487), which criticized Bartholomeo Ramis s Musica practica (Bologna, 1482). 5

13 But, most slippery reviler, how were you able to come to the entrance of Parnasus and the home of the Muses without Latin? How could you, having yourself been moved very little from the common track, lecture not only on music but also on philosophy and mathematics and the other noble arts? since you repeatedly urged me (that is, if at any time I had intended to write to you) that everything should be explained in the mother tongue, 9 as if you did not differ from the common herd. No other enemy was better able to declare war on me than one devoid of letters. 10 You corrupt the minds of the students by your dishonor and pervert the discipline itself. Because eyes suited to seeing do not suffice for me, for that reason it is enough, Spataro, for me to come to see that I might carefully comprehend your errors and [those] of your teacher Bartholomeo Ramis, which you never could have considered yourself. Since, then, you have been unable to distinguish those things which have been observed by the learned, it remains for me, with the gaze of Lynceus, 11 to recall into light through the testimony of learned men the truth, gushing from the sources of the Greeks and the Latins. 9 I.e., in Italian. 10 I.e., knowledge of Latin. 11 In Greek mythology Lynceus was an Argonaut famous for his keen eyesight. 7

15 2. When, then, in your 15 th letter you bring up this sesquioctave, 9:8, arithmetically divided into nine tiny parts, which you requested from a mathematician you must know that this division is not taken into consideration by music theorists if it is really arithmetic, since it does not have intervals that are complete and clear but places of transition that are obscure [and] incongruent with harmony. Your mathematician could have notated a sesquioctave containing sequential productions more clearly with whole numbers and nine spaces, that is, with the derived outer terms surrounding the remaining intermediate terms in sequence as here: 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72; 15 for in fact 81:72 produces the sesquioctave ratio and 81:80 makes a sesquioctogesima, but 80:79 makes a sesquiseptuagesimanona, and 79:78 a sesquiseptuagesimaoctava, whereas 78:77 makes a sesquiseptuagesimaseptima, 77:76 demonstrates the sesquiseptuagesimasexta, 76:75 introduces the sesquiseptuagesimaquinta, 75:74 is the sesquiseptuagesimaquarta, 74:73 makes up the sesquiseptuagesimatertia, and lastly, 73:72 completes the sesquiseptuagesimasecunda ratio. 3. Also, when you invoked the authority of Marchetus the Paduan, you seemed ready to condemn your teacher Bartholomeo Ramis of Baetica, 16 whom you praise as iconoclastic. In the first book of his Practica after discussing Guido s hand, he values Marchetus (whom Joannes Carthusinus notes [as] needing the stick) at four Venetian marcheti, as if reproving him as wrong and useless In his Errori de Franchino Gafurio da Lodi (Bologna, 1521) 5.2, Spataro gives the original notation as 9:8-8/9:8-7/9:8-2/3:8-5/9:8-4/9:8-1/3:8-2/9:8-1/9:8. 16 I.e., Andalusia. 17 Ramis Musica practica

17 4. I think that you dreamed that Marchetus divides the tone into nine dieses (as you write); for if the diesis is half the smaller semitone, as Boethius 23 and the common school of music theorists propose, the tone would [then] contain four smaller semitones and half a semitone, which is unheard of, for the tone is completed by only two smaller semitones and a comma, as Boethius concludes in the 6 th and 7 th chapters of the third book of the Musica. 24 But if I remember well, Marchetus divides the tone into five dieses, and he notes a smaller semitone of two, and an apotome of three, and he establishes another semitone of four; and he calls one of them diatonic, another chromatic, and the third enharmonic. 25 Music theorists, however, do not recognize this division of the tone, which is false. 5. But if you suppose that the tone contains nine commas, as certain writers hold, 26 Severinus Boethius will beat you with a stick in the 15 th chapter of the third book of the Musica, 27 for there he proves that the tone is smaller than nine commas and larger than eight. I discussed these things at length in the 14 th chapter of the second book of De harmonia Boethius De institutione musica Boethius De institutione musica 3.6, Marchetto of Padua Lucidarium 2.5. The semitone composed of two dieses is the enharmonic, the one of three is the diatonic, and the one of four is the chromatic. 26 Gafurio identifies these writers as John Hothby and Giorgio Anselmi in De harmonia instrumentorum opus Boethius De institutione musica Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus

19 6. If Georgius Anselmus 32 had not established the beginning of the whole harmonic system on the string lowered by a tone from the proslambanomenos, which Guido wrote as _ ut, or in his lowest octave; the placement of a chromatic plectrum between the second and third strings, that is, between the hypate hypaton and the parhypate hypaton, would be wrong, since they are distant from each other by only a minor semitone, and plectra, according to him, were inserted in order to divide the intervals of the tones into major and minor semitones; and for that reason Anselmus s chromatic construction is seen to differ little or not at all from the construction of the mixed genus in the 15 th chapter of the first book of De harmonia. 33 Thence those chromatic semitones of Anselmus and those which your mathematician notated in the tetrachord of this letter from proslambanomenos to lichanos hypaton, are not exactly chromatic, for in each chromatic tetrachord the two lower intervals of semitones do not fill a tone, as is shown in the first, second, and seventh chapters of the second book of De harmonia, 34 following Boethius; and if they did complete it we would call it not the chromatic genus but the mixed; hence the interval would be a composite tone. 32 Here Gafurio cites the second book of Anselmi s De Musica (1434), which describes his division of the monochord. 33 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2.1, 2, 7. 13

21 7. I described the mixed genus in which I considered single tones to be divisible into two unequal semitones, large and small, by a plectrum, so that in each tetrachord anyone can observe three species of the diatessaron easily and clearly by this partition. 36 I add that with this kind of help the tritesinemenon string (even if the remaining strings of the tetrachord do not require conjunctae) 37 would sound an interval of a perfect diapente, that is, three tones and a minor semitone, by the sesquialter interval with the plectrum placed between lichanos hypaton and hypate meson. 38 Again it would harmonize in the duple measurement with proper and whole intervals an equisonant diapason with the plectrum placed between the proslambanomenos and the hypate hypaton. 39 Also the other plectra, placed according to the mixed genus, will produce and perfect full intervals with each other by proportional measurements, the progressions of which are customarily called musica ficta or acquisita. Yet you would not think that the ratios of the numbers are congruent with musical intervals, unless the sounding strings will have been placed according to their natural measurement, and the intervals agree with the differences of the numbers of the strings, as can easily be understood and perceived when this whole diatonic system has been harmonically divided. 36 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 1.15, I.e., musica ficta. 38 i.e., a perfect fifth between E b and B b. 39 i.e., a perfect octave between B b and the B b above. 15

25 Again, although it was permitted, according to the usage of Guido, for clerics singing ecclesiastic songs of the fifth tone diatonically to descend by a smaller semitone below the proper final, 42 as I have noted in the eighth chapter of the first book of my Practica; 43 nevertheless, it pleases some to descend all the way to the plectrum placed between the lichanos hypaton and the hypate meson, 44 from which if the singing voice will have arrived at the tritesinemenon a complete diapente (of three tones and a smaller semitone) will sound in the sesqualter interval, as has been said. You will also agree [that] the same [is true] when you strike together the plectrum placed between the proslambanomenos and the hypate hypaton (which was lowered from the parhypate hypaton by the sesquioctave interval of the tone) and the parhypate meson string, 45 for the outer strings are distant from each other by three tones and a smaller semitone, in the hemiolic measurement I hold it to be worthwhile to know that if from the first string of each tetrachord you divide the whole monochord into nine equal parts upward, the first part will place a plectrum between the second and third strings of that tetrachord, distant from the first by a tone I.e., the pitch E below the final F. 43 Gafurio Practica Musicae Again, the pitch E b. 45 I.e., a perfect fifth between B b and F. 46 I.e., 3:2. 47 This description, and the one following, of dividing the monochord according to the mixed genus, is a paraphrase from De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus

27 10. So that when from the second string of each tetrachord, you will have reckoned the whole monochord to be divided into eight equal parts upwards, by turning the points of a compass up and down, you will place a plectrum at the sesquioctave interval [from the second string], between the first string of that tetrachord and the next one lying below it, distant by a tone; 51 and thus each interval of the tone is very easily divisible into two unequal semitones, major and minor or vice versa, whether through the primary, diatonic division or the secondary, mixed; however, in the primary construction the intervals of the tones are simple, but in the second they are composite. And indeed the tone is always set in the sesquioctave ratio: the sesquinonal interval is not called a tone, for it is smaller than the sesquioctave by the sesquioctogesimal ratio; 52 nor does the sequiseptima produce a tone, for it exceeds the sesquioctave by the sesquisexagesimatertial ratio. 53 Again, the sesquioctave interval of the tone can be divided into two smaller semitones and a comma, and since the interval of the comma is the smallest that can be perceived by the sense of hearing, as Boethius asserts in the 10 th and 13 th chapters of the third book, 54 it obtained no interval and no discrete, suitable sound accommodated to harmony. But Baccheus proposed that the diesis, having been brought into harmony, be congruent with half of the smaller semitone, 55 which diesis Severinus assigned to the enharmonic construction of the tetrachords Giovanni Spataro claims in Errori de Franchino Gafurio da Lodi 5.11 that Gafurio sent him a corrected copy of the Apologia, in which Gafurio stated that the phrase tono distantem is a mistake and should read maiore semitonio distantem. The Latin text is ambiguous in that the phrase could modify either the accusative plectrum or continuam. But regardless of which noun it modifies, either phrasing still produces the desired outcome: the pitch Bb. The translation given isolates the phrase in question, illustrating and preserving the ambiguity. Gafurio neither confirms nor denies this claim in any of his later writings. 52 I.e., (9:8) (10:9) = 81: I.e., (8:7) (9:8) = 64: Boethius De institutione musica 3.10, Bacchius Geron Introduction to the Art of Music. 56 Boethius De institutione musica

29 It is surely suitable and certainly necessary that the sounds of the strings are recognized by the mind and the ears; for sounds perish unless they are remembered, since they cannot be written down, as Isydorus says. 60 For that reason the sonorities of the strings are assembled in vain through reason and knowledge unless they will have been learned very well by use and practice; by whose application I have decided to inscribe this entire diagram of the mixed measurement Isidore of Seville Etymologies Gafurio borrowed the diagram from his De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus

31 11. Division of the tone into small and large semitones or into two small semitones and a comma, which I call the mixed genus, since it includes the chromatic extension without departing from the diatonic. Figure 3b. Diagram of a Divided Monochord (Translation) 25

33 12. Moreover, in your 16 th letter filling four sheets of paper, you adduce many things that are superfluous and scarcely necessary for the display of your cleverness. You strive to prove that this mean 6:5:3 is harmonic since the sounding strings represented by these numbers, when struck together, produce harmony, which is indeed easily conceded, for the outer terms ascribed to the sounding strings sound the consonance of a diapason by the duple proportion; thence from the string of the largest term to the string of the middle term sounds a minor third, exceeding the semiditone by the sesquioctogesimal ratio, 64 and from the string of the middle term to the outer term, that is, the smallest, sounds a major sixth, lessened by the sesquioctogesimal ratio. 65 And indeed, although these three strings produce a good harmony when struck together, it is not the sweetest mean that the three strings represented by the terms 6:4:3 sound by nature. Pythagoras, Plato, and Aristotle celebrate this harmonic mean, above all, as the ultimate harmony, for the diapason consists of whole invervals the diapente of 6:4 and the diatessaron of 4:3 and these complete the diapason and add up to the duple ratio. They scarcely sound dissonant to your Ramis in the second chapter of the third book of the Practica, where he writes about this harmonic mean I.e., (6:5) (32:27) = 81: I.e., (27:16) (81:80) = 5:3. 66 Ramis Musica practica

35 While the consonance of the diapente, although it is filled by three tones and a smaller semitone, when mediated, bears two intervallic and harmonious parts, a ditone and a semiditone; seeing, however, that they produce a somewhat disagreeable harmony (even if they repose in the natural and Pythagorean relation) 70 Ptolemy yet carefully considers by sense and reason that the interval of the diapente can be divided into two epimorial ratios, 71 that is, sesquiquarta and sesquiquinta. 72 Although the conjoined ratios make a sesqualter, like 6:5:4, and the diapente is produced from three tones and a minor semitone, nevertheless, the sesquiquarta does not complete the ditone, and the sesquiquinta exceeds the semiditone. Thus the middle string, mutually tempered, moves, changed by the sesquioctogesimal measurement. These things are explained very clearly in the 35 th, 36 th, and 37 th chapters of the second book of De harmonia and most shrewdly argued in the eighth chapter of the third book In your seventh babbling letter, you derive the mean 1:2:3 as purely harmonic with the diapente below and the diapason above, which I do not admit, for the differences of the terms do not agree with the outer terms in ratio; 74 for that reason it will produce a harmony not very distant from this most pleasant harmony 6:4:3. Again since the duple 2:1 placed above the sesqualter 75 has by nature no mean number by which it can be harmonically mediated wholly and in orthodox fashion, it cannot be made equal in sweetness to the harmonic mean 6:4:3. 70 I.e., the Pythagorean ditone = 81:64, and the semiditone = 32: I.e., superparticular ratios. 72 Gafurio borrowed this statement from his De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2.15; however, Ptolemy never explicitly states this in his Harmonia. 73 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2.35, 36, 37; I.e., (3-2) : (2-1) 3:1. 75 I.e., in the proportionality 1:2:3. 29

37 I add that this is so on account of the equality of the differences (and thus of the intervals), for (when governed by the arithmetic mean) the sesqualter interval below is equal to the duple interval immediately above it, 76 as is clearly manifest on the basis of the measurement of the flute players scale in the 37 th chapter of the second book of De harmonia Nor will it be equal in pleasantness of sonority to the harmonic mean produced by the triple ratio of the extremes and the respective differences [of the mean and the extremes] in this way: Figure 4b. Diagram of a Harmonic Mean (Translation) For that reason, the difference of the two larger terms is seen to hold the difference of the two smaller terms by the same amount that the largest term approaches the smallest 78 which really is characteristic of the harmonic mean, as in the diagram above. 76 I.e., 3-2 = Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus I.e., (6-3):(3-2) = 6:2. 31

39 15. In addition, good man, you damn Pythagoras, the investigator of natural secrets, because in the entire disdiapason system he did not derive the sesquiquarta and sesquiquinta intervals as consonant. Indeed this can be considered a fact on account of the accidental variation which accrues to them, since they diverge from the whole and proper intervals, that is, from the ditone and semiditone, by the sesquioctogesimal ratio, for Pythagoras himself, following nature, considered whole intervals and whole parts as members of intervals, which were derived entirely through multiplicity and superparticularity to the construction of harmonic means. Socrates and the divine Plato, who had heard both Dracon of Athens and Metellos of Agrigento speak on music, followed him; moreover, Aristotle and lastly Torquatus Boethius certainly studied him. Thence Guido d Arezzo notated an ecclesiastical song diatonically, but before him the holy Popes Ignatius, Basil, Hylarion, Ambrose, Gelasius, and Gregory ascribed monophonic melody to sacred and divine services Suirataps, as a walking crab, should you not think that the most prudent prophets, whose names are to be feared almost by the sound itself, 85 gave themselves up to constant vigil and study? Surely diligence has laid aside nothing of antiquity. But in your petulance and ingratitude, you seem to follow your teacher Ramis readily (no less impure than you yourself). 84 Gafurio discusses the achievements of these men in his Theorica musice Ovid Heroides : Ilion et Tenedos Simoisque et Xanthus et Ide/ nomina sunt ipso paene timenda sono. The Latin text s cuius must be read as quorum if the passage is to make sense. 33

41 For if (as you assert) he elicited the sesquiquartal and the sesquiquintal harmony from Ptolemy (inasmuch as by the testimony of authority there is no need I should have said, by your leave, though it is easy to blame the dead who will not answer), he would be readily called a thief and a liar. But you, because you have departed from the learned evidence of Gafurio (though it may be hard for you to kick against the pricks) 89 with well known incredible ingratitude, you attacked your Gafurius with spite and petulance, slanderously barking like a dog. 17. [According to] you, which teacher will they believe in instructing adolescents in music, and how will they have accepted one devoid of learning and full of spiteful slanderings, filthy morals, and petulance? By means of what doctrine of your iconoclastic teacher will young men progress in being introduced to music? since, moreover, he wrote a dark and confused Introductorium with these eight syllables psal-li-tur per vo-ces is-tas. For there the natural minor semitone was marked by a different and dissimilar indication; so that by this observation, he himself, frightened and led by penitence (having neglected to mention it) was compelled to return to Guido s diatonic Introductorium, 90 into which he also inserted the mixed genus as if supported by chromatic compressions (although falsely), as is very clearly observed throughout the course of his Practica. 89 Acts 24: Guido s Introductorium was a system of twenty-two pitches representing overlapping hexachords. Gafurio discusses this system in Practica musicae 1.2 and in Theorica musice

43 18. In your 18 th and final letter you accused me of ascribing, in the third chapter of the fourth book of the De harmonia, the upper limit of the Dorian mode to the nete sinemenon pitch, 95 even though the tetrachord of the conjunctas is not allowed in any illustration of the intervals. There I do place the nete sinemenon as the highest string, and we can also call it the paranete diezeugmenon since, inasmuch as sitting in the same place they emit one and the same pitch when plucked together. But to produce this diatessaron, there is no need of the tetrachord of the conjunctae, nor does the completeness of the tetrachord of the disjunctae proceed from it. Rather, this diatessaron corresponds to that species which the Hypodorian, mediated arithmetically at the diapente below, observes from the proslambanomenos 96 to the lycanos hypaton, For going from the mese to the parnete diezeugmenon by a tone (through a disjunct one), semitone, and a tone is the same as going to nete sinemenon, as has been said: according to Guido s doctrine, from a la mi re to d la sol re. 97 But if (as your iconoclastic teacher proposed in the first chapter of the third book of his Practica) the fourth species of diapason is made from lycanos hypaton to paranete diezeugmenon divided by lycanos meson, that is, proceeding, according to Guido, from D sol re to d la sol re (mediated on G sol re ut by the first species of diatessaron below and the fourth species of diapente above), the natural authority of the ecclesiatiastical first authentic tone would be subverted, for it is the Dorian residing in the fourth figure of the diapason; and because the sacred melody would have proceeded weakly, the leader would have deviated to the follower I.e., the pitch d. 96 Because is was added on to the original system of Greek tetrachords, the proslambanomenos is often referred to as the assumpta. 97 Gaffurio seems to say that it does not matter whether d is named as a member of the synemmenon tetrachord or the diazeugmenon tetrachord, as long as the species of the diatessaron from a to d is seen to be the same as that from A to D. Perhaps the issue, for Spataro, was that the diezeugmenon tetrachord includes what we call B natural, the synemmenon tetrachord B-flat. 98 I.e., the mode would change from authentic to plagal. 37

45 19. Moreover you mentioned the ninth chapter of the fourth book of the De harmonia, where the Hypermixolydian mode is noted by Ptolemy [as] eighth in the order, from mese to nete hyperboleon, higher than the others, corresponding to the Hypodorian due to similar intervals. You assert that Ptolemy constructed the Hypermixolydian differently from the Hypodorian in the full diatonic system of fifteen strings by different intervals, that is, through the species of the diapente and the diatessaron. I should be glad for you to know that the Hypermixolidian is different from the Hypodorian (not in form but only in register) through the entire scale of the Hypodorian, since they possess only a single string in common, the mese. For, since each mode preserves the consonance of a diapason, 87 the diapason, in turn, happens to be varied by seven types, that is, by various species (one species fewer than there are notes ) which will have progressed in the event beyond seven of these figures, inasmuch as it will have a single string in common with the first, it is not postulated as differing from the other in form, but they differ from each other only in register, as is clearly explained in the ninth chapter of the fourth book, 101 reinforced by the authority of Boethius in the 13 th chapter of the fourth book of the Musica. 102 Thence the Hypermixolydian mode, which might be reckoned above the Mixolydian, is higherpitched than the Mixolydian by a note through its entire structure, and Ptolemy reckoned it among the other modes, as this species of the diapason (although repeated in order) was notated by a similar indication from the mese to the nete hyperboleon Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus Boethius De institutione musica Gafurio continues an incorrect tradition that Ptolemy included the Hypermixolydian as the eighth mode. See Bower, Fundamentals of Music, p. 160 n

47 Nor should you think it to be that tone which ecclesiastics place as eighth, and plagal, since the eighth plagal tone includes the fourth species of diapente above, from lichanos meson to paranete diezeugmenon or from G sol re ut to d la sol re, and contains the first species of the diatessaron descending from the lichanos meson to the lichanos hypaton, or from G sol re ut to D sol re. But the Hypermixolydian will possess the entire structure from the mese to the nete hyperboleon or from the first a la mi re to the second aa la mi re, as is described very clearly in the seventh chapter of the first book of my Practica after the seven notated species of the diapason I should have dealt with your first two slanderous letters: I think that a response should be made concerning those things for which you reproached me with respect to some unessential points in the book De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum, and firstly to the first, signed Bologna the last day of February 1519, I say that the tetrachord and quadrichord are not considered differently, for each encompasses four strings. 21. But the most ancient tetrachord of Mercury sounded a diapason between the two outer strings, and the middle strings, to themselves and to the outer strings respectively, produced a tone, a dyapente, and a diatessaron by these numbers 6:8:9:12; 105 thence [they produced] four of the strings: hypate, parhypate, paranete, and nete; the form of the four harmonic elements by the first the lowest note, the second the less low, the fourth the highest, and the third the less high Gafurio Practica musice Gafurio borrowed this from his Extractus parvus musicae (c.1474): Prima autem corda ad quartam diapason resonabat, medie vero ad se inuicem atque extremas tonum, dyapente ac diatessaron offerebant, quibus nil repriebatur inconsonum, quarum Mercurium invenimus inventorem fuisse. The Latin text atque ad medias inuicem diatessaron ac tonum quibus diapente respondebant rursus diatessaron his numeris producebant is problematic. The translation given is a combination of the two texts: At tetrachordum antiquissimum Mercurii duabus extremis chordis diapason consonabat atque medie ad se inuicem atque extremas tonum, dyapente ac diatessaron his numeris producebant Here Gafurio combines several different accounts of the tetrachord of Mercury: the description of the intervals is taken from Boethius De musica 1:10, the numbers themselves are customarily associated with Pythagoras, and the string names and associations with the elements are taken from De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus

49 But since the outer ones sounded a diapason with each other and the remaining ones sounded according to the stated ratios, so that they easily packed the remaining intervals of the four strings together from various terms with an added plectrum and they touched the fullness of seven discrete pitches with the fingers, which is also perceived by demonstration in the simple three-stringed lyre. Nor should you think that a tetrachord is always understood as the consonance of a diatessaron, that is, the consonance of two tones and a semitone, produced by the sesquitertial interval. For any interval contructed from four strings is called a tetrachord or a quadrichord. To be sure, a tritone constructed from four strings from parhypate meson to paramese is a tetrachord, even though it exceeds a diatessaron. 22. Furthermore a triple interval by the progression of these four strings: proslambanomenos, hypate meson, mese, and nete diezeugmenon; sounding together a diapason and diapente, is a tetrachord, but not a sesquitertia. 23. Likewise a composite tone, that is, a tone of the mixed genus, with a minor semitone connected to it, as from proslambanomenos to pahypate hypaton, is a tetrachord (but neither a sesquitertia nor a diatessaron.) 24. The Austrian Johannes Cochleus, the music teacher of Nuremberg, names the four-part book, that he wrote concerning music, the Tetrachordum Lychaon of Samos, who joined an eighth string to the musical system, is believed by very many to be Pythagoras himself. 111 But these things are customarily ascribed to legend and not fact. 110 Cochlaeus Tetrachordum musices (Nürnberg, 1511). 111 See Bower Fundamentals of Music, p.32 n

51 26. In your second slanderous barking signed Bologna the 22 nd day of March 1519, you assert that the minor semitone 256: 243 is not precisely that which comes about in actual practice in consonances of the new harmonic instrument; rather it is larger and increased beyond it by the sesquioctogesimal ratio. Indeed it is true, for according to Ptolemy, as I explained in the 34 th chapter of the second book of the De harmonia, 115 those two superparticular intervals, that is, sesquivigesimatertia and sesquiquadragesimaquinta, adduced in place of the minor semitone, placed enharmonically, exceed it by the sesquioctogesimal ratio, which can easily be perceived from what I wrote in the 37 th chapter of the second book, 116 with respect to the harmonious power of the sesquioctogesimal ratio in apportioning intervals by diminution or augmentation, as is certainly dealt with in this diagram in which the melodic genera have been placed the chromatic of Severinus Boethius, the soft chromatic of Ptolemy, and the enharmonic of each Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus I.e. (24:23) + (46:45) (256:243) = 81: Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus Gafurio borrowed the diagram from his De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus

55 27. Often, the minor semitone 256:243 happens to be diminished in numerous musical instruments by the sequisexagesimatertial ratio 64:63, as Ptolemy decrees in the construction of the tonic diatonic genus, producing a tetrachord from low to high through the sesquivigesimoseptimal, the sesquiseptimal, and the sesquioctave intervals, which I noted in the 29 th chapter of the second book of De harmonia But the ratio of the minor semitone, 256:243, even though it is superpartient, adheres more closely to the superparticularity of the sesquidecimaoctava than to the sesquidecimanona; however this hardly seems to apply to my proposition. 29. In addition, the diatonic tetrachord of Boetius is exceedingly well suited to the practice of musical instruments, and of course Ptholemy himself is known to celebrate it as the natural origin of all intervals, from which the remaining genera are arranged, 122 as is reckoned at the end of the 20 th chapter of the second book of De harmonia. 123 And on that account, all the genera of melodies are reduced through the transposition of the individual genera to the diatonic itself, as to the beginning from which they emerged, as I clearly demonstrated in the 24 th, 25 th, and the following chapters of the second book of De harmonia Moreover, I am not forgetful of how incredibly loquaciously you barked when you were asserting that the duple and sesqualter intervals produce a sesquitertia, placing a duple 4:2 and a sesqualter 2:3 in this order, 4:2:3, which you judged falsely. 121 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus I.e., 28:27, 8:7, 9:8 122 Literally, fall [into place]. 123 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2.24, 25; etc. 49

57 For if 4:2 is the duple, 2:3 demonstrates the subsesqualter, hence 4:3 the sesquitertia, for the duple and sesqualter make the triple in this way, 6:3:2; but the duple and the subsesqualter (because the latter is of minor inequality, the former of major inequality) show the sesquitertia in this way, 4:2:3, the reason for which I noted in the 20 th chapter of the first book of De harmonia where it reads thus: Insuper est considerandum But if you had seen the De proportione proportionum disputatio of Volunnio Ridolfi of Spoleto, 129 which the most celebrated mathematician, philosopher, and physicist Giovanni Marliani of Milan had formerly argued and described most famously at the Gymnasium of Ticino, that very blindness would certainly not have led you into this error. 32. Lastly although I trembled at the insults yours! and petulance of your accomplices (calumniators and half-breeds!), I had decided to remain completely silent. In the words of an expert: Don t match words with the verbose. 130 But since your 13 th letter, signed on the 15 th of last October, arrived, having been led to repent, I submit to responding. For in it you show yourself hardly responsive to my question. I had asked you: if consonance is a mixture of a high sound and a low sound falling uniformly and sweetly on the ears, in what way is it a mixture by conjunction, or by adhesion of one to the other? Again, which sound in the consonance is it that unites more to the other, the high to the low or the low to the high? And which of the two is predominant? 128 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus Vollunio Ridolfi De proportione proportionum disputatio (Rome, 1516) 130 Cato Disticha 1.10; text available in facsimile at 51

59 For in the 13th problem of the part on harmonics, the Elucidator Pietro D Abano proposed thus, because it certainly makes sense that the high passes through into the low, and because it makes sense that the low is not permuted to the high, 137 a topic which Severinus Boethius himself pursued in the permutations of the diatonic to the chromatic and to the enharmonic in connection with the easy arrangement of the strings. For the descent to Avernus is easy, 138 draw with a compass the whole ratio of terms and the known measurement of the harmonius intervals. But in that context Aristotle says, speaking about sound, the lower supports the higher; 139 thence that which has been written, Cursed will be the man who ignores his reputation, 140 for even though I endure wounds made by my own weapons, nevertheless, I do not become afraid of that horrible monster, for weapons foreseen hurt less. 141 For, through [his] verbosity and slanderous barkings (as pagans are wont to do), he thinks himself to be held a rather expert music theorist. What envy, oh madman, what petulance has led you to inflict dog bites? and to thrust in madness and poison, and to be always annoyingly denounced when, if you survive, you will be promising unjustly to me. Don t you know, you monstruous brute, that in the opinion of the prudent man wisdom does not enter into a malevolent spirit? 142 To whom will you not emerge as a laughing stock? when they know that you have fallen because of that boldness [so] that you admit that you undergo labors and wakefulness in order to teach Franchinus, from whom, now over thirty-two years, you have already learned almost everything you know. 137 Pietro D Abano Expositio problematum Aristotelis cum textu Virgil Aeneid Pietro D Abano Expositio problematum Aristotelis cum textu Gafurio uses the word sustentat for the original fortificat. 140 Arpad Steiner, The Vernacular Proverb in Medieval Latin Prose (American Journal of Philology 65 [1944]: 37-68), identifies a similar Qui sic neglexerit famam suam crudelis est as coming from Pierre D Ailli, Sermones (Brussels, 1483). 141 Source unidentified. 142 Wisdom

61 Hesiod had predicted your envy saying, This envious singer hates a singer. 149 It was Diogenes Synopaeus who encouraged you and your accomplices (I make an exception for the restrained ones), for even if you desired to join strings and voices to harmony, he does not permit the clumsy and awkward stirrings of the body and soul of a person to be changed. Guido d Arezzo would have reckoned you among the foolish singers of his time You write in addition that Laurenzo Gazio, the learned Cremonese monk, well skilled in music, had come to you and had words concerning that canon of your teacher, It can be sung in perfection of the minims through three genera of melodies. 151 But because you indubitably believe Boethius to have been the great expositor of music (by your leave and my own modesty), you should believe no false authority. For his works, almost infinite in number, declare him to have been the most celebrated jurist, philosopher, mathematician, orator, poet, astronomer, and music theorist of his age. Cassiodorus also attests to his musical knowledge in a letter from the Emperor Theodoric to Boethius himself in this fashion: Since the King of the Franks, having been charmed by the news of our banquet, had repeatedly requested a cithara player from us, we promised to comply just for that reason. Because we knew you to be skilled in the knowledge of music, it is up to you choose one who is learned, through whom you could arrive at a discipline that is difficult to master. For what could be more enduring than that which measures the fabric of the universe with sonorous sweetness and encompasses the harmony of nature dispersed everywhere as a result of its power? etc Hesiod Works and Days, The print had the perfect indicative praenumeravit. 151 Ramis Musica practica Cassiodorus Epistola XL: Boethio patricio Theodericus rex (Patrologia cursus completus, series latina, ed. J. P. Migne, 221 vols. [Paris: Garnier, ], 69:570-73). 55

63 But concerning your teacher s song, Tu lumen tu splendor patris, which he wrote down when he was lecturing at Bologna (even though he was then illiterate); he explained the canon of the tenor written in this way: Figure 6a. Musical Notation of Tu Lumen Tu Splendor Patris (Modern Edition) as follows in the fourth chapter of the third book of his Practica. 153 He proposes that each note equals six measures (through syllables notated on lines and in spaces) just as if this sign were there, inasmuch as the rest of a tempus is placed at the beginning, and thus each syllable denotes one tempus. For it is sung three times: the first time, the second note is raised from the first by a trihemitone, the second time by a tone, and the third time by a semitone. 154 But if the tenor is sung in perfection of the minims through the three genera of melodies, how will the minims, which are not customarily divided into three parts, be perfect? unless he meant them to be in perfect prolation, which divides the semibreve into three minims; and in that case he would have called it more sensibly in the perfection of the semibreves. 153 Ramis Musica practica Quoted from Ramis Musica practica 3.4, with voculam for Ramis s notulam. Notulam makes better sense and is the word translated here. 57

65 Moreover, by what rule will each syllabicated note obtain six measures through the sign since every whole measure is contained in only two minims, systolic and diastolic either in major prolation (as was notated in our tenor Crucifixus etiam pro nobis and in the first Agnus Dei of the Missa L homme armé, and in the tenor Hosanna of the Missa Illustris princeps and in the tenor of the second Agnus Dei of the Missa Le souvenir, which I sent to the most celebrated singers of Pope Leo X), or in minor prolation (which practice teaches) except through application of the rule crescit in duplo, 156 or if the subduple proportion were indicated, as in our tenor Quoniam tu solus sanctus of the Missa L homme armé, where a circle with a dot is marked for perfect time and perfect prolation, and the subduple ratio [is shown] in this way, by the indication of which the semibreve contains three minims and each minim doubles in value; or if any canon, puzzle, or even a ratio were written. Again, the rest of a tempus placed at the beginning is not a sign of perfection in time, but it is a figure measurable in terms of silence, for the sign of perfect time is a circle, but that of imperfect time is a semicircle. 156 I.e., the note values double. 59

67 34. Then when you proceed diatonically ascending from the first syllable to the second, that is, from tu to lu you make an ascending semiditone, and from lu to men the opposite, a descending semiditone. Again, from tu to splen there is an ascending diatessaron, from splen to dor a descending tone, and from dor to patris there will be an ascending tone. Indeed, this diatonic and natural genus was certainly implemented according to Boethius and Guido. 35. But singing chromatically, you proceed from tu to lu by the interval of a incomposite tone, because if there were another syllable on F fa ut, the tone from tu to lu would be called composite and would be sung through two different semitones, as you assert; but this, however, is false. For, in each chromatic tetrachord, the intervals of the two lowest semitones do not complete a tone, as Severinus prescribes, and which I indeed showed more clearly in the first, second, and seventh chapters of the second book of De Harmonia. 164 Nor, you will have deduced, did Aristoxenus equate the two lowest intervals of the tetrachord to the tone: neither [in] the soft chromatic, the sesqualter chromatic, nor even the tonic chromatic. 165 Likewise Ptolemy made those two lowest intervals of the soft chromatic much smaller than the tone. For no chromatic tetrachord precisely sustains the interval of a tone, produced exactly by two or three strings. You say that the same happens from lu to men, that is, a descending incomposite tone, which again is problematic, for given one problematic thing, many follow Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2.1, 2, See Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus In Declaratio musicae disciplinae 3.6, Ugolino attributes this phrase to the first book of Aristotle s Physics: ut dicit Aristoteles, primo physicorum, dato uno inconvenienti multa contingent. Gafurio borrowed extensively from this treatise in writing his own Extractus parvus musicae (c.1474) C.f Aristotle Physica 185a (trans. Hope, p. 5). 61

69 However, from tu to splen there is no doubt that a diatessaron should lie between them, for from a line to a space, up or down, a tone or semitone is written, understood, and sung by a note or syllable, and from splen to dor a descending trihemitone will be made. But if in the previous, that is the diatonic genus, there would have been a descending tone from splen to dor, how will the interval of a tone be changed into a trihemitone unless the syllable dor itself or its note will have been placed below by a semitone? for, remaining immobile, it affects no variation on the interval, as is easily perceived in books with musical notation. Even so, in the case of musical instruments, where individual intervals receive strings and measurements of intervals according to the pattern of their own genus as is manifest in the writings of Boethius, Architas, Didymus, Aristoxenus, and Ptolemy, whose computations I diligently printed in the second book of the De harmonia 172 again, since from dor to patris you reckon an ascending trihemitone, you will not avoid the same problem. 36. And you take the enharmonic progression of this tenor through this order: from tu to lu an incomposite semitone is made, because if another syllable stayed above F, from tu ad lu there would have been a composite semitone, that is, one sung through a diesis and a diesis; from lu ad men there will be the same incomposite semitone, but descending. Against this I say that two syllables or two different notes do not coexist on F fa ut or on G sol re ut, since there is but a single position in that place, producing only one pitch with a single string. Thence a second altered string (one of the middle strings) is not written higher in any tetrachord through the different genera. 172 Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2. 63

71 But without doubt, from tu to splen, a whole interval of a diatessaron is measured, certainly showing nothing of the crowding together of the enharmonic genus. Again from splen to dor there will be an interval of a descending ditone, yet from dor to patris you suppose an ascending, incomposite ditone. Then, the chromatic and enharmonic genera, showing no aspect of a characteristic crowding together, lie alongside the tenor that is written above only in the diatonic tetrachord. Thus your teacher Bartholomeo, whom you imitate, did not really prescribe the puzzle and the canon, nor did he understand the formal nature of the compact genera. I ask, through which tetrachord do you say you proceed diatonically in the consideration of this kind of tenor? 175 Through the soft diatonic or raised diatonic, or through the tonic diatonic, or the diatonal diatonic? Again through which chromatically? Through the soft chromatic or the raised chromatic? Or through which enharmonically, the Pythagorean enharmonic, that is the enharmonic of Boethius, or of Ptolemy? You certainly seem to follow the Pythagoreans and Boethius. Surely you do not scorn Ptolemy, from whom (as you assert) your Ramis took the new harmonic system? For I held it shameful for me to treat the best lecturers along with a sorry wretch. But when, indeed, the wretch has raged with such detestable madness against the Theorica musices that he will present it to practiced singers just as if it were a sin. Why is it, O Irregular Leader, 176 that you do not convince singers that the letters do not agree? and that it is not fitting that they [letters] themselves be approved in practice? Aristotle preaches the same in the first book of the Metaphysics, All men by nature desire to know. 177 For this reason I did not allow my labors, gathered by constant study, however many I have applied in musical teaching, to be destroyed undeservedly by you. 175 For the following tetrachord divisions see Gafurio De harmonia musicorum instrumentorum opus 2.18, 19, Thomas J. Mathiesen of Indiana University reports that the word comes from the Greek "heteros" and "klitos," i.e., irregular or unlawful. It is used in Renaissance Latin to refer to heterodoxy and unlawful actions or feelings (for example by Giordano Bruno), and is frequently used in association with baboons. 177 Aristotle Metaphysics

73 Most fickle man, you threaten that these slanderous barkings are to be struck by printers. 183 Certainly your envy, slander, and petulance demand nothing other than that whatever things (and how many of them there were) were in you impure man they should be declared to all. Certainly (because I have not up to now weighed carefully) you will easily be believed to be tormented by a demon. David freed Saul from an evil spirit through the art of music. 184 But, the most celebrated singers of Bologna sing futile songs thanks to your oppression. Yet nor would they believe the strengths and powers of the discipline of music to be deficient, since by the opinion of Aristotle music itself does not work on a badly disposed patient. 185 But if Asclepiades had come, who used to cure the hysterical through harmony he would not be able to restrain your madness. I adapted my eyes (which you impudently assert) to darkness (cunningly, to be sure) and through doing so brought to light authorities books buried in darkness, by means of my own diligence. To you whom nature itself foreknew as malignant, it denied the power of seeing and perhaps of fully hearing. By the third adage we are taught to beware the marked ones. 186 Likewise remaining silent which is customarily sought from a friend would surely have taken care of your frame of mind, just as Terence s Simo desired faith taciturnity in Sosia. 187 For he who knows how properly to be silent is close to God. 188 Also Solomon in Proverbs, The faithful of spirit keeps a secret The following year Spataro published his Errori de Franchino Gafurio da Lodi, which was a collection of errors found in Gafurio s works Samuel 16: Source unidentified. 186 A form of the more popular phrase cave a signatis. In her article The Domestic Enemy: The Eastern Slaves in Tuscany in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries (Speculum 30 [1955]: 349), Iris Origo writes that during this time of increased xenophobia, the phrase was commonly shouted throughout Italian streets, and that any mark or deformity was likely to be the sign of a criminal or slave. 187 Simo and Sosia are characters in Terence s Andria; the latter is the freedman of the former. 188 Cato Disticha 1.3. Text available in facsimile at Proverbs 11:13. 67

75 You certainly provided me the opportunity to write about you, and you strove with incredible malice to lie in ambush of my good name. But nor should you think that I, who indeed despise your madness, wrote these things, which you lividly and petulantly rose up against in my books. Since my works are sensible if they are understood sensibly, and my opinions are correct unless they are misrepresented, for that reason, let it be, that even if you are twisted by an impermissible rage, may the Harmonia of Gafurius, and may his patron Jean Grolier, live forever. Figure 7b. Jean Grolier s Coat of Arms (Translation) Printed in Turin by Master Agostino da Vicomercato, in the year of our Lord 1520, April